<p>
[quote]
one thing that differentiates W&M from the others on the list...is that all undergrad classes are taught by professors.is that all undergrad classes are taught by professors.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>All classes at UCLA are taught my professors. Only discussion sections are taught by TAs. One of my classes this year has only 10 people. The other has 20. I think all classes at Cal are taught by professors as well.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>UVa (jeffersonian traditions, private school feel, rich kids attracting elite recruiters)</p></li>
<li><p>Michigan (well arounded)</p></li>
<li><p>Berkeley (the ultimate school for sciences)</p></li>
</ol>
<p>don't really know much about the rest.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Thanks for looking this up for us, vicissitudes. I was going to after seeing the last comments on the first page, but you beat me to it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Anything for you DRab. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
i really dont know how people came up with these lists, or why UT Austin isn't on the list.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, I agree that UT - Austin should probably be on this list. But, OP didn't include it...oh well.</p>
<p>"-Almost all public schools have to deal with this. Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD all have this issue. plus tons of California cc students transfer in. that problem does not only exist at uiuc."</p>
<p>Yeah, I agree that all state universities have to deal with the pressure coming from its in-state residents. But you don't really know much about the pressure that UIUC is facing, do you? It looks similar to the kind of pressure the other schools are facing, except for it's not and it's much more paramount. If you have read the article on Chicago Tribune about two months ago, you will know what I am talking about. Or you can do some catch-up work here by reading this thread posted on CC months earlier, concerning that article. </p>
<p>90 percent of UIUC's student body consists of in-state students. This percentage is larger than almost all the other top public universities. Why? Its neighbor,U Mich has about 30 percent OOST students, even Indiana has above 25% of OOS students(perhaps higher.) UT-Austin,Penn State...even these slightly lesser schools have higher percentage of OOS student body than UIUC. In states like Michigan or Indiana, they have more than one good/decent public schools that can accommodate in-state students, such as Michigan State and Purdue. I don't even have to start with the many good public universities in Penn,Texas, or California. Unfortunately, UIUC, as the flagship school, is the only good,well-known public university in Illinois, UI-Chicago or UI-Springfield is nowhere near the same level. So the result is all the top high school students in IL choose UIUC has their safety, the mediocre ones choose it as their reach/match. To sum it up, UIUC plays more roles than a regular flagship school would, it's a safety net and an icon all at once. I am not saying that schools like U Mich or Berkeley is not, but at least you got UCLA,UCSD, Michigan State helping out there, sharing the burden.
If you read the article, you will find out that UIUC is in a pretty unique situation regarding its relationship with its in-state residents. The parents refuse to let the school expand its OOS admission and to raise its admission standards, and they are pretty successful so far.</p>
<p>"uiuc has nothing to do with this post, so again why are you using it to try to take focus off the main point of the thread to start an argument about uiuc? clearly your combatant tone and post was only intended to start an argument."</p>
<p>What do you mean "has nothing to do with the post"? The title of this thread is "Battle of the Top Publics". Since we all have different opinions about what these "top publics" are, talking about UIUC here, a top public in my opinion, has everything to do with the topic. And since the thread is about "Battle" after all, what's so wrong with "staring an argument about uiuc"? In my understanding, "Battle" implies that we are to challenge the status of each other's "top publics"</p>
<p>"Although UIUC is a great school, from the impression I have at my high school and the fact that it's everyone's safety school here, I wouldn't agree that it belongs in the top 10. =S Sorry, I know it sucks to have your school knocked about."</p>
<p>Your argument is really ridiculous. Because it's everyone's safety at your school, so it must not be in the top 10. What kind of logic is that. To tell you the truth, UIUC was my safety too, and the safest of my safeties. I was deferred by Princeton, and later got Early Write admission from Wash U. But I ended up choosing UIUC because it gave me very generous financial aid. Does that mean UIUC shouldn't be in the top 10 because it's my safety, by the way some real losers in my school also got in, i am talking about B/C average kids here, because they can afford the $40,000 international tuition. Does that prove UIUC should be kept out of the top 10 cuz it lets in so many mediocre kids? No, selectivity is only one of many factors in determining the greatness of a school. As I explained before, UIUC is facing a particularly unique hardship in the task of improving its selectivity that few other top publics are facing. For god's sake, you should know UIUC's admission rate now is about 70%, meaning pretty much the majority of posters on CC can consider UIUC as their safety/match, which is absurd and ridiculous if you think about it. But UIUC is still faring solidly and standing strong in all the rankings despite its abnormally high admission rate and low OOS student ratio. What other school do you see in the top 40's of USNEWS ranking that has that high of an admission rate. Better yet,where in the ranking are most of the 70%-admission-rate schools? If UIUC just cranked up its admission standards and lowered its admission rate a little bit, like to low 50%, you would see its ranking rise significantly. As a public university, UIUC is outstanding in almost all the other respects, (well besides some problems associated with its sheer size)
And that's why UIUC is ranked in the top 25's in USNEWS' ranking in terms of peer assessment scores which in my opinion is the only thing that really matters. And how could UIUC not be in the top 10 publics if it is considered by professors, deans, and college presidents across the country as one of the 25 most respected national universities?</p>
<p>"-haha i dont even know where to start with that. i have nothing against uiuc, but come on man. berkeley has 8 nobel laureates presently at its campus, ucsd has 10. uiuc is a wonderfull school, but it cannot compare to virginia, ucsd, and wisconsin. its deffiantly a step behind, and the current rankings prove that. i know berkeley and ucsd both have gpa's well above 4.0 and single sitting sat's above 1300. furthermore, virginia is the second most prestigious public university in the country. no offense to uiuc, its engineering dept is amongst the best in the world, but as an overall university it cannot touch berkeley, wisconsin, ucsd, virginia, ect. stop being so narrow minded regarding the university you attend. uiuc wasnt even on this post."</p>
<p>I don't know how many nobel prize winners UIUC has on campus right now. But I know that total number of prize laureates who taught,studied or researched at UIUC beat UCSD's. And I have heard that there are two physics researchers/professors at UIUC who are very likely to win Nobel Prize in the imminent future because of their groundbreaking research papers published recently. The average single sitting SAT score of UIUC fresmen is above 1280 (and 30 for ACT), which, you ask me, is not that different from the 1300's of Berkely and UCSD. If there is ever gonna be a terrorist scheme of sabotaging American institutions of higher education, I bet you that UIUC will be on the US government's top priority list, along with schools like MIT, Stanford, Berkely,Michigan...to be protected at all costs, simply because of its enormous contribution to science, technology and the military in this country.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't know how many nobel prize winners UIUC has on campus right now.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From this it looks like two are on the UIUC faculty right now.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The average single sitting SAT score of UIUC fresmen is above 1280 (and 30 for ACT), which, you ask me, is not that different from the 1300's of Berkely and UCSD.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>25 - 75 percentile for UIUC: 1170 - 1400
25 - 75 percentile for UCSD: 1130 - 1360
25 - 75 percentile for UCB: 1220 - 1450</p>
<p>Actually, UIUC's SATs look really similar to UCLA's: 1170 - 1410</p>
<p>Just wanted to give you some stats.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If there is ever gonna be a terrorist scheme of sabotaging American institutions of higher education, I bet you that UIUC will be on the US government's top priority list, along with schools like MIT, Stanford, Berkely,Michigan...to be protected at all costs, simply because of its enormous contribution to science, technology and the military in this country.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hehe, this was pretty amusing, as ridiculously as it may sound.</p>
<p>W & M 25-75%: 1280-1430</p>
<p>Uva: 1280-1490</p>
<p>Where did you get those numbers?</p>
<p>UVa: 1220 - 1430</p>
<p>William and Mary: 1260 - 1440</p>
<p><a href="http://cfdev.wm.edu/IR/part_c.htm%5B/url%5D">http://cfdev.wm.edu/IR/part_c.htm</a></p>
<p>he got it from here. <a href="http://www.virginia.edu/undergradadmission/profile.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.virginia.edu/undergradadmission/profile.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.wm.edu/about/glance.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.wm.edu/about/glance.php</a></p>
<p>nearly 80 percent of current freshmen graduated in top tenth of their class with the middle 50 percent having total SAT scores ranging from 1280-1430;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.virginia.edu/undergradadmission/profile.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.virginia.edu/undergradadmission/profile.html</a>
ADMISSION STATS (UPDATED MAY 2006)</p>
<p>16,252 applications
5,829offers of admission
3,097 students enrolling (Projected)
87 percent of admitted students ranked in top tenth of class
1280-1490 middle half of class SAT I</p>
<p>"1280-1490 middle half of class SAT I"</p>
<p>NICE!!!!!!!! really impressive for a public school this year. Im sensing an increase in ranking for Virginia.</p>
<p>except that usnews uses info from like 2 years ago in all its rankings lol.</p>
<p>its interesting to note that w&m has gotten slightly less selective over the last few years. the 2003 cds vs. w&m's - I'm sure much more current - website has w&m dropping from 85% in the top 10% of their hs class to "nearly 80%" as of today, and its upper SAT range has also slightly dropped - although I'm sure its overall average SAT score has risen.</p>
<p>I think it's because those kids W&M lost chose UVA! :)</p>
<p>It's kinda cool, though, to have 2 of the most selective public u's in the same state. I am kind of biased-I went to W&M, and my oldest S is starting at UVA this fall. He wanted engineering and big-time sports, and W&M has neither.</p>
<p>Also, on the negative side, both are about 1/3 out of state, and I am sure these kids skew the averages much higher than they would be if it was 90% in-state like UIUC. I can't find anything showing the stats of in-state vs OOS at either school.</p>
<p>Doesn't necessarily "skew" the averages. I'm sure the majority of OOSers are on the high end of the scale, but there are also a bunch of kids instate that have great grades and scores and simply go because its cheap. Remember, virginia isn't a huge state like california is - I'm sure if virginia had like 30+ million people in it, UVA's stats would be even higher.</p>
<p>The top 3 publics had a significant jump in the Mid 50% SAT range. Michigan jumped from 1250-1400 in 2005 to 1270-1480 in 2006.</p>
<p>First, I would like to say thanks everybody for stating their opinion. It was really helpful.</p>
<p>The reason why I left UIUC out of this was simply because it isn't in the top 8 in the USNEWS. I'm sure it's considered one of the top publics and so as UT Austin. I just don't want this thread to become another SAT and endowment and also on "which school should be a top public" arguement. I'm looking for what everyone think would be the most enjoyable and meaningful experience of attending to them and why (And please don't add "the best experience is what you make of it").</p>
<p>Also, I would like to say that I'm planning to transfer to UVa and I haven't seen it compared to it's other publics. I was wondering how come UVa is in the same level as Berkeley and Michigan. Yet most of the departments at Berkeley, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois are top notch while UVa isn't. I mean UVa has McIntire but Berkeley beats UVa in almost the rest in academics. I heard people say that UVa is focused on undergrad, but I don't understand what that means. Can someone please explain this in full detail?</p>
<p>I visited UVa and I thought the architecture was ok. What set me back was that the Lawn had bugs everywhere and it was on top of a hill which was annoying to walk up to(Looking at various pictures of the Lawn, I expect it would be a flat ground). What blew me away was that Scotts Stadium is right next to the dorms. That was freakin awesome!</p>
<p>Sorry, I don't know any other schools. Ok bye!</p>
<p>"The top 3 publics had a significant jump in the Mid 50% SAT range. Michigan jumped from 1250-1400 in 2005 to 1270-1480 in 2006."</p>
<p>Damn! I hate competitions! ;)</p>
<p>"Also, I would like to say that I'm planning to transfer to UVa and I haven't seen it compared to it's other publics. I was wondering how come UVa is in the same level as Berkeley and Michigan. </p>
<p>Well, as you can see in this thread, a LOT of people prefer UVa to the other schools you mentioned when it comes to undergraduate education.</p>
<p>"Yet most of the departments at Berkeley, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois are top notch while UVa isn't. "</p>
<p>WHAT?</p>
<p>I just figured that the other departments in general at UVa aren't as a strong as the departments in other publics such as Berkeley or Michigan.... or so I heard..</p>
<p>Well, if you look at most rankings of depts that is very accurate. UVa is trying to attract more better known research minded profs at great expense for just that reason. The UVa website has several items on that. Also the C'Ville magazine quoted UVa officials saying the same thing.</p>
<p>"Rosanne Ford, associate vice president for research and graduate studies, showed the Universitys bigwigs that, by several important measures, UVA lags behind other upper-echelon schools. While 35 of approximately 100 graduate departments at University of California-Berkeley rank in the National Research Councils Top 10, UVA scored only five out of 50, a measly 10 percentfar lower than fellow state schools UC-San Diego, Michigan and Wisconsin."</p>
<p>"</p>